Spine deformity · 2023
Does radiographic calibration affect linear radiographic measurements in a large pediatric spine registry?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Regan Christina M, Morgan Jessica, Hilaire Tricia St, El-Hawary Ron, Pahys Joshua M, Skaggs David L, Yaszay Burt, Parent Stefan, Pediatric Spine Study Group, Larson A Noelle
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Large registries are increasingly at the forefront of modern pediatric spine research, with manual, centralized, trained radiographic measurement serving as the gold standard for spine research. However, there is limited data regarding the reliability of registry measurements which may be subject to differences in radiographic calibration. We undertook this study to evaluate reliability of T1-T12 height, L1-S1 height, and coronal balance measurements for a large registry of early onset scoliosis patients.
METHODS: Three trained technicians from the Pediatric Spine Study Group measured 43 radiographs for T1-T12, L1-S1, and coronal balance using 3 different calibration techniques. All radiographs were AP views of patients with magnetically controlled growing rods with known diameters. The calibration techniques used a pre-export manually drawn line, a digital automatically generated computerized marker, and the diameter of a magnetically controlled growing rod. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated to determine reliability.
RESULTS: 1161 measurements were performed. For each of the three raters, coronal balance, T1-T12 height and L1-S1 height had excellent agreement regardless of the calibration technique (alpha 0.93-1.0). Among the parameters, coronal balance had the worst inter-rater reliability, whereas there was excellent interrater reliability regarding T1-T12 height and L1-S1 height (alpha 0.91-0.99).
CONCLUSION: There was excellent agreement among reviewers and between the 3 different calibration techniques. While calibration using rod diameter served as the gold standard, this data shows that other standard calibration methods were adequate and achieved excellent reliability for registry radiographs.
METHODS: Three trained technicians from the Pediatric Spine Study Group measured 43 radiographs for T1-T12, L1-S1, and coronal balance using 3 different calibration techniques. All radiographs were AP views of patients with magnetically controlled growing rods with known diameters. The calibration techniques used a pre-export manually drawn line, a digital automatically generated computerized marker, and the diameter of a magnetically controlled growing rod. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated to determine reliability.
RESULTS: 1161 measurements were performed. For each of the three raters, coronal balance, T1-T12 height and L1-S1 height had excellent agreement regardless of the calibration technique (alpha 0.93-1.0). Among the parameters, coronal balance had the worst inter-rater reliability, whereas there was excellent interrater reliability regarding T1-T12 height and L1-S1 height (alpha 0.91-0.99).
CONCLUSION: There was excellent agreement among reviewers and between the 3 different calibration techniques. While calibration using rod diameter served as the gold standard, this data shows that other standard calibration methods were adequate and achieved excellent reliability for registry radiographs.